Good morning. This is meeting number 21 of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for the first session of the 42nd Parliament. This meeting is being held in public, and it's televised.

Our business today is the main estimates 2016-17, vote 1 under the House of Commons and vote 1 under Parliamentary Protective Service, followed by a second hour, maybe, with witnesses from the United Kingdom House of Commons in connection with the study of initiatives towards a family-friendly House of Commons.

I will call vote 1 under House of Commons and vote 1 under Parliamentary Protective Service of the main estimates for 2016-17.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's nice to be back at the procedure and House affairs committee after a number of years of absence, and in a different capacity from when I was here as a member of the committee some years ago.

I'm pleased to be joined today by Marc Bosc, the acting Clerk of the House of Commons; Daniel Paquette, the chief financial officer; Chief Superintendent Michael Duheme, director of the Parliamentary Protective Service; and Sloane Mask, the deputy chief financial officer of the Parliamentary Protective Service, or PPS, as I'll call it.

I'll be presenting the House of Commons main estimates first, followed by those of the new PPS.

You should all have a copy of the presentation, so I won't read it. I prefer to give you an overview, so as to leave more time for questions and answers.

I'll begin with the House of Commons main estimates for 2016-17, which total $464 million, an increase of 4.55% over 2015-16.

I'll provide an overview of the relevant line items in the main estimates along four major themes: budgets for members, House officers, and presiding officers; House administration; electoral boundary redistribution; and the PPS.

Let me begin with the budgets for members, House officers and presiding officers.

At its meeting of March 10, 2015, the Board of Internal Economy acknowledged an increase of 2.3%, effective April 1, 2015, to members' annual sessional allowance and additional salaries. This funding is statutory in nature and is in accordance with provisions in the Parliament of Canada Act. The increase amounts to $1.3 million for the 2016-2017 fiscal year and subsequent years.

In December 2015 the Board of Internal Economy approved a one-time increase of 20% to members' office budgets and to House officers' budgets. This comes after six years of these budgets being frozen, the last increase having occurred in 2009-10. Future adjustments will be based on the consumer price index as measured in September of the previous year.

There was also a one-time increase of 5% to the members' travel status expenses account.

Following the general election, the House officers' office budgets were established, based upon the election results for all parties in accordance with the long-standing formula approved by the board. The resulting funding increase of $1.1 million is being sought for 2016-17 and subsequent years.

I should also point out that members' statutory budgets were reduced by $5 million, due in part to savings generated through the individual and corporate flight pass programs.

Let's now look at House administration.

The first element is $3.4 million in funding for salaries of the House administration employees.

Several new and rehabilitated buildings that are part of the long-term vision and plan are opening in the coming years. This will require increased resources and funding. Two examples include the commissioning of the Sir John A. Macdonald Building, last September, and the upcoming commissioning of the Wellington Building, this fall. This funding of $5.6 million was approved for the 2016-2017 fiscal year.

With the opening of these buildings, additional funding is required for salary, operating, and capital expenses to ensure continued support of the building assets transferred from Public Services and Procurement Canada as they are completed. Unfortunately—before you ask—I don't have control of office allocation.

Funding of $3 million for the 2016-17 fiscal year is being sought to support these facilities.

To support the ongoing maintenance of information technology assets and their life-cycle replacement costs associated with the long-term vision and plan, in 2014 the board approved funding on a five-year basis. This year's funding has increased by $982,000.

With regard to funding for security within the parliamentary precinct, this year saw an overall reduction of $25 million as a result of resources being transferred to the PPS, which fully integrates the protective services of the House and Senate with those provided by the RCMP. This $25-million transfer includes funding sought to continue the implementation of the Enhancing Security Across the Parliamentary Precinct project, which had been initiated by the House of Commons prior to the integration of the protective services.

Mr. Chair, this just occurred to me. I should remember what a challenge it can be for the interpreters to interpret when a witness is speaking so quickly, so I'll try to slow down a bit for them. Normally, I speak at about 200 words a minute, with gusts of up to 400.

Additionally, the House is seeking $600,000 to continue the implementation of the emergency notification system—one of our priorities.

Another strategic priority involves modernizing wireless telecommunications services by making the latest smart phones and tablets available to members and staff. A mobile work environment gives members and House administration employees much greater flexibility to carry out their activities and work. This commitment will allow the house to be more adaptable to the ever-changing demands of parliamentary work.

An example of a recent change to the way we do business is of course the creation of the electronic petition system, which was launched in December. As of mid-April, 64 e-petitions had been opened, and more than 150,000 Canadians had added their signatures electronically in support of various policy initiatives. To continue to support the e-petitions system, funding of $195,000 is being requested for 2016-17 and subsequent years.

We will now move on to funding allocated for the electoral boundaries redistribution.

Prior to the election in the fall of 2015, 30 constituencies were added. In June 2014, the board approved temporary funding of $17.6 million for 2015-2016 and permanent funding of $24.5 million for 2016-2017 and subsequent years.

This funding takes into consideration requirements for members, including pay and pension, travel, telecommunications services, office budgets, parliamentary and constituency office expenditures, and additional funding requirements to enable the House administration to support the institution and ensure the same level of services to the expanded membership.

Now for the PPS, the Parliamentary Protective Service, which is one month shy of its first anniversary. It has implemented a single command oversight mechanism, formalized an intelligence unit, and is in the process of deploying a common uniform. Integrated teams now work together on a daily basis at the vehicle screening facility, the place we all know as “the car wash”.

The PPS is focused on deploying resources so as to make the best use of the expertise that already exists within the current complement of employees. I think we're all aware of the increased security presence on Parliament Hill.

In 2016-17 the main estimates for the PPS total $62.1 million, including a voted budgetary requirement of $56.3 million, as well as a statutory budget component of $5.8 million to fund the employee benefit program. The PPS's 2015-16 budget was established by Bill C-59, which transferred the unexpended physical security funds from the Senate, House of Commons, and RCMP.

It's recommended that $32.3 million be permanently transferred to the PPS from the Senate and House of Commons protective services and the RCMP A-base budget.

This would fund personnel, operations and maintenance, and full-time equivalents. This amount includes $4.7 million needed to reimburse the RCMP for the cost of physical security for operations and maintenance. A permanent increase of $14.5 million is required to sustain the current security posture and $5.1 million to sustainably support previously approved salary increases, security enhancement initiatives, and the integrated organizational structure.

The PPS requires a permanent increase of $3.9 million for the funding of an administrative team to manage this new parliamentary organization. A total of $400,000 is required in temporary funding to support the renewal of the baggage screening facility at 90 Wellington through 2016-2017.

This concludes my overview of the House of Commons and the PPS's 2016-17 main estimates. I look forward to questions from members.

When PPS first started off, people came with the equipment that they had. I meet with the president of the association as well as with the president of PSAC on a monthly basis, and the issues are addressed. Mind you, if you have to change an order of dress for 400 people, it could take some time, but the issues are addressed.

This was brought to my attention by members, and I appreciated it at the time. I certainly raised it with the PPS. I'm also looking forward to integration in relation to the uniform that is en route. I think there will be eight pairs of pants and eight jackets for everybody. It takes a long time to get all that from the supplier, but it's coming. We expect it in the coming weeks, hopefully.

There's an overall review being done of all the operational posture we have right now to determine the best way forward for the resources and for the recruiting of additional resources.

To give you an example, for the recruit program that's scheduled to take place in July, I think we're looking to process 30 individuals, and there are 500 applicants for it. We are maintaining the training and filling in the vacancies.

As it stands, right now they're separate. We're respecting both collective bargaining agreements until we come to an understanding on the way forward. We did submit a proposal to the board in November to go to one single bargaining agreement. We're still waiting for the way forward on that.

Another thing that came up in the last Parliament—I was a staffer here at the time—was the question of privilege related to access to the Hill. I think it's related to state visits. I remember Yvon Godin, and I saw that incident happen outside the window where I happened to be standing at the time.

With all the new people coming in and all the integration, are a lot of people coming on who aren't aware of privilege? How is the training going to make sure that it doesn't happen again?

All of them are briefed as they enter into PPS. We're putting the final touches on a little pamphlet the members can keep as a gentle reminder of what parliamentary privilege is. When there is a visit on the Hill, we'll make sure that our members are briefed and reminded of parliamentary privilege.